Results 221 - 240 of 559
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Wild Olive Shoot Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
221 | Still not convinced preterism is false | Matt 16:28 | Wild Olive Shoot | 183768 | ||
“I did not say that no one could count in the 1st century, only that counting beyond ten or twenty and calculating mathematically was beyond the vast majority, and with many their limitation would be counting to three.” That’s a very interesting thing you point out. Why, with so much mention of numbers and the fact that someone had to count, I wonder how limited they were. But then again, those of the first century, well the words probably weren’t meant for them since they couldn’t comprehend anyhow. I guess God inspired those to speak and write so only future generations could understand. Those of the first century were just meant to be confused. Matthew 14:19-21: 19 And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. 20 And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full. 21 And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children. Who counted the loaves and fishes and baskets and people? I guess this was conveyed only for a more learned people. Deuteronomy 25:3 Forty stripes he may give him, and not exceed: lest, if he should exceed, and beat him above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile unto thee. I would really hate to be the one getting the forty lashes while knowing I may get 50 because someone can’t count past three. But it was probably okay to break a command of God because you couldn’t count. Matthew 18:22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven. Hope they had a calculator for this one. Leviticus 12:2-5: 2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. 3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. 4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. 5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days. Don’t even want to attempt to figure how they knew this. John 21:11 Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken. Someone had to count the fish. Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: The good doctor may have been able to count to 40, but someone had to tell him it was forty. Now I’m no expert on the educational standing of first century people, but most couldn’t count past three??? What they do with the extra fingers? WOS |
||||||
222 | scriptural basis for loving self | Lev 19:18 | Wild Olive Shoot | 183637 | ||
The assumption then my friend, is mingled with the commandment and many times at that. If I am a hater of myself, and am not right with my Lord, how can I effectually commit myself to His work for me? We have responsibilities that sometimes do involve putting our house in order, do you not agree? “This commandment means, evidently: 1. That we should not injure our neighbor in his person, property, or character. 2. That we should not be selfish, but should seek to do him good. 3. That in a case of debt, difference, or debate, we should do what is right, regarding his interest as much as our own. 4. That we should treat his character, property, etc., as we do our own, according to what is right. 5. That, in order to benefit him, we should practice self-denial, or do as we would wish him to do to us, Mat_7:12. It does not mean: 1. That the love of ourselves, according to what we are, or according to truth, is improper. The happiness of myself is of as much importance as that of any other man, and it is as proper that it should be sought. 2. It does not mean that I am to neglect my own business to take care of my neighbor’s. My happiness, salvation, health, and family are committed especially to myself; and, provided I do not interfere with my neighbor’s rights or violate my obligations to him, it is my duty to seek the welfare of my own as my first duty, 1Ti_5:8, 1Ti_5:13; Tit_2:5. Mark adds to these commandments, “Defraud not;” by which he meant, doubtless, to express the substance of this to love our neighbor as ourselves. It means, literally, to take away the property of another by violence or by deceiving him, thus showing that he is not loved as we love ourselves.” – Albert Barnes Mark 12:31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. Luke 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. James 2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
223 | Virgin Mary | Ex 20:4 | Wild Olive Shoot | 183037 | ||
I don’t agree with your definition of blessed, and maybe even the others. Blessed is more along the line of being highly favored or fortunate. Not necessarily holy. “Call me blessed - Pronounce me highly favored or happy in being the mother of the Messiah. It is therefore right to consider her as highly favored or happy;” – Albert Barnes To be holy is to set apart by God or for God for some special use. Which I believe Mary was as were and are many. Does that imply others are perfect? Paul and Peter were both holy, but we know of their failures and even more, we know of God’s pardoning of those through Christ. Mary was no different. You “assume” much in stating so. Now we can be righteous, in the sense of being “upstanding”, but perfect righteousness is only obtained through Jesus Christ. From Easton’s Bible Dictionary: Justification: …”It proceeds on the imputing or crediting to the believer by God himself of the perfect righteousness, active and passive, of his Representative and Surety, Jesus Christ (Rom_10:3-9). Justification is not the forgiveness of a man without righteousness, but a declaration that he possesses a righteousness which perfectly and for ever satisfies the law, namely, Christ's righteousness (2Co_5:21; Rom_4:6-8). The sole condition on which this righteousness is imputed or credited to the believer is faith in or on the Lord Jesus Christ.” … So if as you say, Mary was perfect in righteousness, and that is imputed from Christ, then tell me friend, who isn’t? Read all of Romans Chapter 4 but at least take a quick glance at the below, paying close attention to verse 8. Romans 4:3-8: 3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. 6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
224 | Virgin Mary | Ex 20:4 | Wild Olive Shoot | 183017 | ||
Brian, That’s quite a stretch to say Mary was perfect when the Bible never states that. In fact, Mary, as the rest of us, was far from perfect and even she herself admitted to needing a savior. Luke 1: 46-48: 46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. That to me seems far from perfection. Romans 3:23 – 25: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 1 John 1:8: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. She may have been a great disciple, but not a perfect one. If God’s Word does not declare something, we should use caution in making that declaration ourselves. Just my thoughts. Stand in HIS grace, WOS |
||||||
225 | The raven (Gen 8:7)... | Gen 8:7 | Wild Olive Shoot | 182117 | ||
xina, Here is some commentary from Matthew Henry you may find interesting, if you haven't happened upon it yet. "1. Noah sent forth a raven through the window of the ark, which went forth, as the Hebrew phrase is, going forth and returning, that is, flying about, and feeding on the carcases that floated, but returning to the ark for rest; probably not in it, but upon it. This gave Noah little satisfaction; therefore, 2. He sent forth a dove, which returned the first time with no good news, but probably wet and dirty; but, the second time, she brought an olive-leaf in her bill, which appeared to be first plucked off, a plain indication that now the trees, the fruit-trees, began to appear above water. Note here, (1.) That Noah sent forth the dove the second time seven days after the first time, and the third time was after seven days too; and probably the first sending of her out was seven days after the sending forth of the raven. This intimates that it was done on the sabbath day, which, it should seem, Noah religiously observed in the ark. Having kept the sabbath in a solemn assembly of his little church, he then expected special blessings from heaven, and enquired concerning them. Having directed his prayer, he looked up, Psa_5:3. (2.) The dove is an emblem of a gracious soul, which finding no rest for its foot, no solid peace or satisfaction in this world, this deluged defiling world, returns to Christ as to its ark, as to its Noah. The carnal heart, like the raven, takes up with the world, and feeds on the carrions it finds there; but return thou to thy rest, O my soul, to thy Noah, so the word is, Psa_116:7. O that I had wings like a dove, to flee to him! Psa_55:6. And as Noah put forth his hand, and took the dove, and pulled her in to him, into the ark, so Christ will graciously preserve, and help, and welcome, those that fly to him for rest. (3.) The olive-branch, which was an emblem of peace, was brought, not by the raven, a bird of prey, nor by a gay and proud peacock, but by a mild, patient, humble dove. It is a dove-like disposition that brings into the world earnests of rest and joy. (4.) Some make these things an allegory. The law was first sent forth like the raven, but brought no tidings of the assuaging of the waters of God's wrath, with which the world of mankind was deluged; therefore, in the fulness of time, God sent forth his gospel, as the dove, in the likeness of which the Holy Spirit descended, and this presents us with an olive-branch and brings in a better hope." - Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
226 | The Name /One Lord | Matt 28:19 | Wild Olive Shoot | 181765 | ||
It should be further noted that to deny any office of Christ as intended is to deny Christ: 1John 2:21 - 24: 21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. 22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 24 Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father. "But there was a greater witness than he; even God himself, by a voice from heaven, bore a testimony to him; and angels, at his incarnation, declared him to be the Saviour, which is Christ the Lord; yea, the devil himself, who is a liar, and the father of ties in other things, knew and owned Jesus to be the Christ; so that those that deny him are the worst of liars, even worse than the devil himself. This may have regard not only to the Jews, that deny Jesus to be the Messiah, but chiefly to such who went by the name of Christians; who denied either his proper deity, or real humanity, as Ebion and Cerinthus, which was denying him to be the God-man, the Mediator, and Messiah; and is true of all such that deny him in any of his offices, or in things relating to them, as his Gospel, and any of the peculiar doctrines of it, delivered by him, and so deny his prophetic office; or any of his ordinances, institutions, and appointments, as lawgiver in his house, and King of saints, and so deny him in his kingly office; or reject him as the alone Saviour, joining their own works with him, in the business of salvation, and oppose his sacrifice and satisfaction, and despise his imputed righteousness, and so deny him in his priestly office." - John Gill Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
227 | What is blocking us from God's love? | Rom 8:39 | Wild Olive Shoot | 181364 | ||
New Creature, nothing is blocking God's love. The verses you cite all refer to our love to and of Him or as in Isaiah 59:2, something we have done to hide God from us. How can the command be issued for us to keep ourselves in the Love of God if the love referenced is that of God's? Seems He would be issuing that command to Himself??? "The reason which he gives for their doing this is the strength of the love which he had shown for them. His love was so great for them that he was about to lay down his life. This constitutes a strong reason why we should continue in his love: "... ..."In my love - In love to me. Thus it is expressed in the Greek in the next verse. The connection also demands that we understand it of our love to him, and not of his love to us. The latter cannot be the subject of a command; the former may. See also Luk 11:42; 1Jo 2:5; Jud 1:21." - Albert Barnes The throne of grace is always accessible to us, we simply choose not to approach. Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
228 | Circumcision reduces HIV rates by half | Gen 17:11 | Wild Olive Shoot | 181280 | ||
You mention many ways in which the virus is transmitted (some of which are still directly related to sinful lifestyles), but by your topic of discussion, you imply the spread of the virus through fornication and science's attempt to remedy that with circumcision, otherwise, why the concern? Whether or not one is circumcised has no ramifications on spreading the virus through other means. Sorry if I missed your point, but so long as modern science seeks an attempt to remedy a situation in part, to still allowing sinful lifestyles without the consequences, they are far from God's wisdom. Psalm 111:10 The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of wisdom; A good understanding have all they that do his commandments: His praise endureth for ever. That’s just my opinion though. Stand in His Grace, WOS |
||||||
229 | Circumcision reduces HIV rates by half | Gen 17:11 | Wild Olive Shoot | 181274 | ||
It's hard to imagine the ethics were that different from then to now when you take into consideration Sodom and Gomorrha. However, when you state "Even in a monogamous marital relationship, if one partner has HIV, the rate of transmission to the other is reduced by half, in either direction, man to woman or woman to man."… Please elaborate on how one contracts the virus if this is the nature of their relationship. God had it right. See my previous post on this subject. Rather than sending doctors, maybe we should concentrate on sending the Gospel. Stand in His Grace, WOS |
||||||
230 | Circumcision reduces HIV rates by half | Gen 17:11 | Wild Olive Shoot | 181260 | ||
If that in fact does substantiate a potential 50 percent reduction, just think of what the possibilities could be if we take to heart the following: 1Thessalonians 4:1-5: 1 Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more. 2 For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus. 3 For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: 4 That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; 5 Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: 1Corinthians 6:15-18: 15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. 16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. 17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. 18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. “but he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his own body; not meaning his wife, which is as his own body; but his proper natural body, which is not only the instrument by which this sin is committed, but the object against which it is committed; and which is defiled and dishonoured by it; and sometimes its strength and health are impaired, and it is filled with nauseous diseases hereby.” – John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible “Sinneth against his own body - This is the Fourth argument against indulgence in this vice; and it is more striking and forcible. The sense is, “It wastes the bodily energies; produces feebleness, weakness, and disease; it impairs the strength, enervates the man, and shortens life.” Were it proper, this might be proved to the satisfaction of every man by an examination of the effects of licentious indulgence. Those who wish to see the effects stated may find them in Dr. Rush on the Diseases of the Mind. Perhaps no single sin has done so much to produce the most painful and dreadful diseases, to weaken the constitution, and to shorten life as this. Other vices, as gluttony and drunkenness, do this also, and all sin has some effect in destroying the body, but it is true of this sin in an eminent degree.” – Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible Imagine the possibilities. Stand in His Grace, WOS |
||||||
231 | "Happiness is what it's all about."? | Gen 1:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 180944 | ||
"The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; the people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up,"—Matthew 4:15-16. "In the text, those persons who were more deplorably circumstanced than others are described first as being in darkness—"The people that sat in darkness;" by which is meant, first, ignorance. The Galileans were notoriously ignorant: few teachers of the law had been among them; they did not know even the letter of the law. So are there many, to whom the gospel, even in the theory of it, is a thing scarcely known. They may have gone to places of worship in this country from their youth up, and have never heard the gospel, for the gospel is a rare thing in some synagogues; you shall hear philosophy, you shall hear ceremonialism and sacramentarianism cried up, but the blessed truth, "Believe, and live," is kept in the background, so that men may come to full age, ay, and even to old age, in Christian England, and yet the plan of salvation by the righteousness of Jesus Christ may be an unknown thing to them. They sit in the darkness of ignorance. The consequence is, that another darkness follows, the darkness of error. Men who know not the truth, since they must have some faith, seek out many inventions; for, if they are not taught of God, they soon become taught of Satan, and apt scholars are they in his school. Galilee was noted for the heresies which abounded there. But what a mercy it is that God can save heretics. Those who have received false doctrine, and added darkness to darkness in so doing, can yet be brought into the glorious light of truth. Though they may have denied the Deity of Christ, though they may have doubted the inspiration of Scripture, though they may have fallen into many traps and pitfalls of false doctrine, yet the Divine Shepherd, when he seeks his lost sheep, can find them out and bring them home again. In consequence of being in the darkness of ignorance and error, these people were wrapt in the gloom of discomfort and sorrow. Darkness is an expressive type of sorrow. The mind that knows not God, knows not the heart's best rest. There is no solace for our griefs like the gospel of Jesus Christ, and those who are ignorant of it are tossed about upon a stormy sea, without an anchorage. Glory be to God; when sorrow has brought on a midnight, grace can transform it into noon." - C.H. Spurgeon I don't know how "happy" Einstein may have been, but Scripture tells us Christ was in no way joyous with the task he was about to undertake and be it for sinners, those who rejected Him. Would Albert have died to save another eternally? I doubt it since this could not have made him happy. There is such a great love that has been shown to us, the Love of a Savior who suffered and died for us and showed us the great light of truth. Yet so often, we forego that light and attempt to muddle around in the darkness and find our “happiness”. It won’t happen. You may believe it has, but the darkness or even the self-imagined light you think you have found without Christ, is nothing compared to His grace and the love He has for us. Cry out to Christ. He can shine that light upon you and once you see its splendor and feel a touch of its warmth, you’ll run from the darkness and He’ll be there to welcome you. Stand in His Grace, WOS |
||||||
232 | Isn't adultrey grounds for divorce? | Hosea | Wild Olive Shoot | 180885 | ||
"It was this that Jesus was referring to - if it was done in the engagement period." I don't think so. "except it be for fornication; or whoredom, for defiling his bed: for this is not to be understood of fornication committed before, but of uncleanness after marriage, which destroys their being one flesh:" - John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be... The key word there is wife. It doesn't say his espoused or betrothed but "his wife". Big difference. Stand in His Grace, WOS |
||||||
233 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | Wild Olive Shoot | 180604 | ||
I think I may see what you are trying to get at. Just for talking points, I’m not submitting anything impregnable, (no pun intended) I’ll address with my opinions some of the questions I see raised in the post. Q: Does it not qualify as adultery by virtue of the fact it was God who was involved? I would have to agree that it was not adultery, firstly, as you stated, it was not a sexual act. Simply because it was the Holy Spirit acting upon Mary also informs me that it was not adultery, physically or spiritually. Bottom line here is God cannot sin and would not partake of tempting anyone to sin. So from both God’s standpoint and Mary’s, there was no act of adultery, neither physically nor mentally. Q: Would Joseph feel betrayed? I think at first Joseph, by seeing what is recorded in the Gospels, did feel at least some sort of betrayal as he ponder things and because his plan was to divorce her, be it quietly. But I also propose this was before the angel of God informed him of what had actually taken place. At that point, we see his obedience and read no more about any sort of distrust or apprehension on his part, at least it is not recorded. My view is that God took great care in ensuring Joseph was okay with what happened. After all, He could have had Mary simply deliver the message and maybe she did and maybe Joseph already had some idea. But God sent an angel to inform Joseph. How could he not be okay with that? Albert Barnes writes in reference to Matthew 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: “Did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him - That is, he took Mary to wife. Probably this was done immediately, since he was now convinced of her innocence, and, by delay, he would not leave any ground of suspicion that he had not confidence in her.” Q: Why it may be different because it was God, not man? “for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost; she has not been guilty of any criminal conversation with men; this conception of her's is of the Holy Ghost, and entirely owing to his coming upon her, and overshadowing her in a wonderful and miraculous manner. I say, the Angel not only encourages Joseph after this manner, but delivers something to him by way of prophecy, in the following verse.” – John Gill I think Joseph understood that and therefore looked upon this event as a divine event and being encouraged by the angel of the Lord that there was nothing to fear, considered it no longer. Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. “Joseph, suspecting she was with child by whoredom, was afraid of taking her, lest he should bring upon himself either guilt or reproach. No, saith God, Fear not; the matter is not so. Perhaps Mary had told him that she was with child by the Holy Ghost, and he might have heard what Elizabeth said to her (Luk_1:43), when she called her the mother of her Lord; and, if so, he was afraid of presumption in marrying one so much above him. But, from whatever cause his fears arose, they were all silenced with this word, Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife. Note, It is a great mercy to be delivered from our fears, and to have our doubts resolved, so as to proceed in our affairs with satisfaction.” - Matthew Henry Just my opinions, and some others. Stand in His Grace, WOS |
||||||
234 | 1st John 3:9 | 1 John 3:9 | Wild Olive Shoot | 180603 | ||
But with me Brother, you may have waited for some time, you know me and my lack of a quick response. :) Besides, when it comes to eloquence, you've got me hands down. WOS |
||||||
235 | What happens immediatly after you die? | 2 Corinthians | Wild Olive Shoot | 180342 | ||
Brother Edwin, To your comment: …“which is why Jesus was able to say to the thief, "This day", because, as far as he is concerned, it is still this day.”… By advocating this, you are essentially claiming that Christ lied to the thief because the thief would not know any different. Are you sure you want support that position while taking into consideration the many references that have been posted in response to this subject? Just something to consider. Stand in His Grace. WOS |
||||||
236 | The Law made void? | Rom 3:31 | Wild Olive Shoot | 179677 | ||
Following is some commentary on the law regarding it being made “void” and I used the word void, because I see many who have taken “we are no longer under the law” or “the law has no power over us” to mean just that. Frankly, that is not what God’s Word conveys to us. We are dead to the law, only in regard to our condemnation by it, for Christ ended that and God’s mercy and our faith assures us of that. Just my two cents worth. Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. “Yea, we establish the law - That is, by the doctrine of justification by faith; by this scheme of treating people as righteous, the moral law is confirmed, its obligation is enforced, obedience to it is secured. This is done in the following manner: (1) God showed respect to it, in being unwilling to pardon sinners without an atonement. He showed that it could not be violated with impunity; that he was resolved to fulfil its threatenings. (2) Jesus Christ came to magnify it, and to make it honorable. He showed respect to it in his life; and he died to show that God was determined to inflict its penalty. (3) The plan of justification by faith leads to an observance of the Law. The sinner sees the evil of transgression. He sees the respect which God has shown to the Law. He gives his heart to God, and yields himself to obey his Law. All the sentiments that arise from the conviction of sin; that flow from gratitude for mercies; that spring from love to God; all his views of the sacredness of the Law, prompt him to yield obedience to it. The fact that Christ endured such sufferings to show the evil of violating the Law, is one of the strongest motives prompting to obedience.” … …”Jesus has died to satisfy its claims, and lives to honor its precepts. Thus, he hath brought in “righteousness,” which, being imputed to them that believe, forms such a ground of pardon and acceptance, as the Law cannot challenge.” – Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible “yea, we establish the law. The law is not made void, neither by the grace nor doctrine of faith: not by the grace of faith; for that faith is not right which is not attended with works of righteousness; and those works are not right which do not flow from filth. Such a connection there is between faith and works; and so much do the one depend upon the other. Moreover, none but believers are capable of performing good works aright, and they do them, and they ought to do them: besides, faith, as a grace, looks to Christ, as the end of the law for righteousness, and therefore do not make it void. Nor is it made void by the doctrine of faith, and by the particular doctrine of a sinner's justification by faith in Christ's righteousness, which is here more especially intended; for though it is made void by it, as to any use of it for justification by the deeds thereof; yet its use in other respects is not set aside, such as to inform us of the mind and will of God, to discover and convince of sin, to show believers their deformity and imperfection, to render Christ and his righteousness more valuable, and to be a rule of walk and conversation to them; and it still remains a cursing and condemning law to Christless sinners, though justified ones are delivered from it as such: yea, the law is so far from being made void, that it is established by this doctrine; for by it the perpetuity of it is asserted, the spirituality of it is acknowledged, the perfect righteousness of it is secured: according to this doctrine all its demands are answered; whatever it requires it has, such as holiness of nature, perfect obedience to its precepts, and its full penalty borne: it is placed in the best hands, where it will ever remain; and a regard to it is enforced under the best influence, by the best of motives, and from the best of principles.” – John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible |
||||||
237 | Is this disciple following Jesus, Judas | John 21:20 | Wild Olive Shoot | 178713 | ||
Edd, Perhaps then, Judas was the writer of John’s Gospel account, for no man at the table knew why Christ spoke what He had to Judas, except the author of John. John 13:23-29: 23 Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24 Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. 25 He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it? 26 Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. 27 And after the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly. 28 Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him. 29 For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor. Clearly, it was John whose head was on Christ’s bosom and was so privileged to hear the heartbeat of God. WOS |
||||||
238 | Women Preachers? Yes or No? | 1 Cor 1:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 178577 | ||
When someone such as Kuhlman or Hinn can walk into a cancer ward or burn center in any one of our many Children's Hospitals and walk out with the place empty, then I think we can say something. But come on, do you really think that will happen? I'm inclined to think that such an enormous fascination with people of this sort is simply a matter of so many not realizing that God's grace is sufficient. It is, honestly, because He said so. Faith in people such as Hinn is a false and failing faith. Faith in Christ is a saving faith. We so strongly desire to see miracles worked that we defend lies and treachery to make us feel better. If so many more would realize the sufficiency of God, and how it works through faith in Christ, we could say good-bye to the heartbreak brought about by those who wrongfully claim to have the gift of healing. 2Corinthians 12:8-10: 8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. 9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. …”nothing short of the grace of Christ is sufficient grace; and this is sufficient for all the elect of God, Jews and Gentiles, Old and New Testament saints, the family in heaven and in earth, the people of God that are already called, and are to be called, and for the worst and vilest of sinners; and it is sufficient to all saving purposes, to the acceptance of their persons before God, to their justification in his sight, to their pardon and cleansing, to their regeneration and sanctification, to the supply of all their wants, and to their perseverance in grace unto glory; and it is sufficient in all their times of need, in times of bodily affliction, of violent persecution, soul desertion, Satan's temptations, and at the hour of death, and in the day of judgment.” – John Gill Stand in His grace. WOS |
||||||
239 | once saved always saved? | John 6:39 | Wild Olive Shoot | 178053 | ||
Dear Gunner, Do not place your sins, past present or future, above what Christ accomplished for you on the cross, what His blood has purchased. Do not in the same, take this as a “license” to sin. Paul addressed this in the 6th chapter of Romans: Romans 6:1,2: 1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Paul answered as someone regenerated would, “God forbid.” Some who is not regenerated might very well render a “yes” in answer to the question. Romans 6:3-14: 3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: 6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. 7 For he that is dead is freed from sin. 8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: 9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. 10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. 12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. 13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Stand in His grace. WOS |
||||||
240 | Is it disrespectful to not use a title | Bible general Archive 3 | Wild Olive Shoot | 177757 | ||
To your question: “Does that look like it can be used as a title?” Most certainly if read in the proper context. I don’t wish to debate this with you Sister. Simply wanted to provide some Scripture you claimed didn’t exist. Christ has many titles and Apostle was one of them and most assuredly it was implied and applied by the author of Hebrews as I have pointed out. If you do your word substituting here and elsewhere, the Twelve could not have the title either so let’s just remove the word and the title and office it is associated with. Some commentary below that I find helpful. Hope you do as well. In Him, WOS “The apostle - The word “apostle” is nowhere else applied to the Lord Jesus. The word means one who “is sent” - and in this sense it might be applied to the Redeemer as one “sent” by God, or as by way of eminence the one sent by him. But the connection seems to demand that; there should be some allusion here to one who sustained a similar rank among the Jews; and it is probable that the allusion is to Moses, as having been the great apostle of God to the Jewish people, and that Paul here means to say, that the Lord Jesus, under the new dispensation, filled the place of Moses and of the high priest under the old, and that the office of “apostle” and “high priest,” instead of being now separated, as it was between Moses and Aaron under the old dispensation, was now blended in the Messiah. The name “apostle” is not indeed given to Moses directly in the Old Testament, but the verb from which the Hebrew word for apostle is derived is frequently given him. Thus, in Exo_3:10, it is said, “Come now, therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh.” And in Heb_3:13, “The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you.” So also in Heb_3:14-15, of the same chapter. From the word there used - shaalach - “to send.” The word denoting “apostle - shaliyach - is derived; and it is not improbable that Moses would be regarded as being by way of eminence the one “sent” by God. Further, the Jews applied the word ” - shaliyach - “apostle,” to the minister of the synagogue; to him who presided over its affairs, and who had the general charge of the services there; and in this sense it might be applied by way of eminence to Moses as being the general director and controller of the religious affairs of the nation, and as “sent” for that purpose. The object of Paul is to show that the Lord Jesus in the Christian system - as the great apostle sent from God - sustained a rank and office similar to this, but superior in dignity and authority.” – Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible “the Apostle and High Priest of our profession — There is but one Greek article to both nouns, “Him who is at once Apostle and High Priest” - Apostle, as Ambassador (a higher designation than “angel”-messenger) sent by the Father (Joh_20:21), pleading the cause of God with us; High Priest, as pleading our cause with God. Both His Apostleship and High Priesthood are comprehended in the one title, Mediator [Bengel]. Though the title “Apostle” is nowhere else applied to Christ, it is appropriate here in addressing Hebrews, who used the term of the delegates sent by the high priest to collect the temple tribute from Jews resident in foreign countries, even as Christ was Delegate of the Father to this world far off from Him (Mat_21:37). Hence as what applies to Him, applies also to His people, the Twelve are designated His apostles, even as He is the Father’s (Joh_20:21). It was desirable to avoid designating Him here “angel,” in order to distinguish His nature from that of angels mentioned before, though he is “the Angel of the Covenant.” The “legate of the Church” (Sheliach Tsibbur) offered up the prayers in the synagogue in the name of all, and for all. So Jesus, “the Apostle of our profession,” is delegated to intercede for the Church before the Father. The words “of our profession,” mark that it is not of the legal ritual, but of our Christian faith, that He is the High Priest. Paul compares Him as an Apostle to Moses; as High Priest to Aaron. He alone holds both offices combined, and in a more eminent degree than either, which those two brothers held apart.” – Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Next > Last [28] >> |